WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just be

To: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC
From: ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Eric W. Biederman)
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 01:21:47 -0700
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Len Brown <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 01:22:16 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C66250DB.DC85%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Keir Fraser's message of "Sat\, 20 Jun 2009 08\:39\:55 +0100")
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <C66250DB.DC85%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux)
Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On 20/06/2009 00:44, "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>> I assume that putting AML into Xen has been considered, but I don't
>>> anything about those deliberations.  Keir? Jun?
>>> 
>> 
>> Yes, it was one of the options years ago. We did not do that because Linux 
>> and
>> Solaris (as dom0) already had the AML interpreter and it's overkill and
>> redundant to have such a large component in the Xen hypervisor. Since the
>> hypervisor does most of the power management (i.e. P, C, S-state, etc.)
>> getting the info from dom0 today, we might want to reconsider the option.
>
> Yes, we could reconsider. However is there any stuff that dom0 remains
> responsible for (e.g., PCI management, and therefore PCI hotplug) where it
> would continue to need to be OSPM, interpreting certain AML objects? In
> general how safe would it be to have two layered entities both playing at
> being OSPM?

Short of running the oddball acpi based drivers.  I'm not familiar with
any acpi in the pci management.

Eric


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>